Weighing in...collecting from other cultures...

Nathaniel · 12th October 2010, 12:46 AM

Hello all!

I thought I would start a thread and hear peoples thoughts on on a semi sensitive subject..

Collecting antiquities from other cultures...I've met online/ in person collectors from the cultures I collect....some are very helpful and enthusiastic that others are interested in their culture, while others seem to lament about "their cultural heritage" being in foreign lands/hands. I can empathize to an extent....

I can think of parallel examples such the Elgin Marbles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elgin_Marbles
Interesting read...at the bottom there are points on both sides of the debate of whether the frescoes should be kept in England or returned to Athens.

Back to bladed antiquities...which parallels some of the same debate....We have all seen pictures of native museums that have wonderful preservation....and others who make us shutter to see active rust and open air exposure to the elements

Some of this can obviously be explained by lack of funding or education of proper preservation...or a difference in cultural attitude towards preservation ...or differing opinions as to the extent of restoration a piece should under go...as we can easily find here among forum members...at one point it preserves at another point it brings out hidden beauty...and to others it drops the value.

Most of the best examples I've seen of many cultures weapons are from collections, museums in Europe and the US....which can be partly explained by bring backs from travelers or careers abroad...purchased at times when perhaps the native culture did not appreciate as much their "old things" or perhaps at less fortunate times when selling something to get by.

And the better condition of the antiquities due to better care...such as nice layer of oil applied to blade to ward off rust...or something as simple as a change in climate...such as a less humid climate compared to their country of origin. Some argue that if such items where not removed from the of origin it would have been lost to neglect, war, pollution, etc

On the darker end of the spectrum I have also seen items that have been stolen/ smuggled out of a country....items such as a severed Buddha head that was taken from temple in Northern Thailand...I find sickening...interestingly this was the subject of a great Thai action movie: Ong Bak - Thai Warrior. (This bridges of course into sacred religious items which should always be treated with respect regardless of ones faith and never violated in such way.)

I should also point out that at the same time many countries have laws against removal of antiquities from the country....but at the same time have a large population of antique shops?!?

What constitutes something that should not be taken out of the country? At what age does the item become an antique? Major items like a large marble fresco I think we can all agree on....but something like a sword, a knife or musket? these are everyday utility items...should they be considered the same cultural value as the marble fresco? Both are of value...part of course is weighed by the rarity.

Nathaniel · 12th October 2010, 02:37 AM

....Okay, so while that is not all...I would love to hear the opinions of others...I see there have been several views..

imas560 · 12th October 2010, 03:06 AM

Interesting subject,
how much should a person know before embarking on collecting from another culture? I think I stepped on some toes last year when I was in Kuala Kangsar wanting a keris repaired and wanting to get some items made. I may have inadvertently caused offence by my lack of knowledge of what was allowable on a keris. I had posted on a couple of forums (unfortunately not this one) and thought I had gathered enough information to think I was ok in requesting a dragon head on a custom made keris. But when I described what I wanted I got a very distinct vibe of causing offence. In the end I requested a keris without the dragon head and some other items including a Pedang that was to have a dragon head hilt. It's been over a year and still no word on the items being made or the keris being repaired. I have a niggling feeling that I'm not going to see the items or the deposit and that the keris may be "lost".
In regards to an item being classified as old and not being allowed out of the country I believe in New Zealand (where I live) any indigenous artifacts over 50 years old are not allowed to be sold for export. I may be wrong but I will try and hunt out the info.
BTW the keris for repair was bought at auction in NZ and I transported it back to Malaysia to be repaired. I thought I would treat it reverently and get it repaired in it's homeland.

Neil · 12th October 2010, 03:28 AM

That is an interesting line of questioning Nathanial. For me, a weapon is not a sacred object and can in that light be fair game to collect, appreciate, and study by those in an outsider group. Although some weapons may be of major historic significance warranting some measure of government regulations to at least keep them in the country of their origin. Personally, I think in the end it is up to conscientious individuals inside and out to preserve and pass on the knowledge and stories that these things represent.

Nathaniel · 12th October 2010, 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by imas560

Interesting subject,
how much should a person know before embarking on collecting from another culture? I think I stepped on some toes last year when I was in Kuala Kangsar wanting a keris repaired and wanting to get some items made. I may have inadvertently caused offence by my lack of knowledge of what was allowable on a keris. I had posted on a couple of forums (unfortunately not this one) and thought I had gathered enough information to think I was ok in requesting a dragon head on a custom made keris. But when I described what I wanted I got a very distinct vibe of causing offence. In the end I requested a keris without the dragon head and some other items including a Pedang that was to have a dragon head hilt. It's been over a year and still no word on the items being made or the keris being repaired. I have a niggling feeling that I'm not going to see the items or the deposit and that the keris may be "lost".
In regards to an item being classified as old and not being allowed out of the country I believe in New Zealand (where I live) any indigenous artifacts over 50 years old are not allowed to be sold for export. I may be wrong but I will try and hunt out the info.
BTW the keris for repair was bought at auction in NZ and I transported it back to Malaysia to be repaired. I thought I would treat it reverently and get it repaired in it's homeland.

Wow, not cool....thanks for sharing...That is a challenge to find a skilled and honest craftsman...I know I've contemplated having things restored in other countries...

It can definitely be very challenging to do research in a native culture....even if you speak the language....I know some of my friend they are Chinese but born in the USA...when they go back to China if his parents are trying to bargain for something, he is to keep his mouth shut...because even though he speaks fluent Chinese the sellers would pick up his accent.

kahnjar1 · 12th October 2010, 03:33 AM

Good to know there is another member (apart from Illiad) residing in NZ.
The subject raised by Nathaniel has been discussed here in part in previous posts, and is (or can be) a touchy subject especially where native races are involved. This all began in a large way during the "colonial" era, when mainly european powers were grabbing as much of the world as they could in as short a time as possible, and raped and pillaged antiquities at the same time.
In the case of NZ it is the Maori who are repatriating as much of their tribal heritage as possible, and I agree with this.
However the term "cultural" also relates to the ordinary, and for the most part common items, of ANY particular ethnic race. Hence it also should apply to such things as English and other antique weapons as much as to items of other origins. Are we about to send all these back to their countries of origin? I don't think so!!
IF an item is of particular HISTORICAL or TRIBAL interest then that is a different matter. Most of us collect "mainstream" items, and are probably not lucky enough or rich enough to own really important pieces.
Regards Stuart

Lew · 12th October 2010, 03:37 AM

Well I do Not agree with the argument that some of these old weapons belong back in their native countries. Some areas in Africa where there is civil,political and economic unrest these weapons would probably be melted down for scrap.
We collectors are only temporary custodians of these items and in a way we insure that they will be around for future generations to enjoy. Hopefully one day some of these pieces will find their way back to their country of origin.

Gavin Nugent · 12th October 2010, 03:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathaniel

....Okay, so while that is not all...I would love to hear the opinions of others...I see there have been several views..

Well written and well spoken Nathaniel, I look forward to further dialogue.
Many valid notations to consider. Balance in anything is Key and every situation in every moment in time has different factors to consider.

I too have seen many different views from the helpful to the lamenting.
So many items, so many personalities. So many reasons how they ended up with us all. My manner in dealing with these notations is rather varied and each individual relationship is considered on its own merit. Somethings I feel will always stay with me because I feel I can offer it the most stable enviroment, anything else outside of this thought of mine is an unknown so better the devil I know, but saying that I have been surprised and will be surprised again :-)

All I can say is do what feels right to you in these dealings. In the end we all depart this physical realm, the universe will sort it all out in its own way long after we are all gone. Enjoy what you have and help others enjoy it too.

One of my most recent rewarding experineces involved the Hayes Kukri I had. I bought it from an estate sale in the UK after a friend sent me some images from his I-phone.
As it was, it was placed there by accident with some other goods by the mother of a gentleman called Justin. She was only cleaning out her fathers estate who recently passed away.
Justin caught wind of this when he asked where it was because it was left to him by his grandfather and he had a wonderful attachment to his Grandfather. He was gutted to say the least when he found out from his mother that it was gone, gone forever.
Well after this gut wrenching experience, Justin went on more determined than ever to research his Grandfathers military history as every single item he ever had pertaining to his time in the military all had the same details, service number, name, rank etc written or engraved in to it, I mean everything.
Well Justin doing a word search found the Hayes Kukri on my site and as he said to me, he cried and ocean and contacted he immeadiately outling the Hayes Kukri story and his personal contact details.
I read it and read it again and saw the sincerity in the mail. Long story short, I contacted him by phone. He was amazed, grateful to have found it and extremely emotional. We agreed on a near cost price and I slipped in to the package the Wadge kukri too (part of his grandfathers estate), he was very clear he didn't want it as he could not afford it (a wife and three kids will do that to you), this good gesture now turns in to Justin finding the correct home for the Wadge Kukri as I feel for it to be in is granfathers estate it was most likely from a friend who has passed.

Whats it all means? Nothing and everything, all a matter of perspective. Justin is now trying to find the Wadge family to pass the Kukri on with the story of his grandfather, he is over the moon and has a story to tell the kids and that family history is back home again, I have a friend for life etc etc but on the matter of the Kukri and where it should lay ethnically , it doesn't come in to the equation despite being a Nepalese weapon by nature, it is were it really belongs.
I think very few weapons could every be placed so exactly where they really belong and this is why I say; "do what feels right to you in these dealings." Every thing has its own rewards be it with you to preserve in your life time or pass to another to with it what they will.

Other points I will let be Nathaniel.

Gav

Nathaniel · 12th October 2010, 05:39 AM

Thanks guys for sharing your thoughts

I agree, we are only temporary custodians and regardless of our origin it is most respectful to help learn from each other, preserve and pass this on to future generations regardless of age, race, color or creed.

Very few of us are 100% anything I might add...scratch below the surface and you see all of our family roots are mix of tribes/ countries/denominations & religions that make in who we are today...so to come out with xenophobic/ xenocentric attitude is not much more than a farce.

It is interesting how attitudes change with time...I have been told from more than one source that there is a Thai belief that swords and even pictures of swords could bring conflict and disharmony to a home if displayed within so that explains some of why perhaps until recently they haven’t been valued by many folks…but this is changing as superstitions become less ‘believed’.

With regards to your comment that a weapon is not sacred, I would follow by saying that to a certain extend it maybe in other cultures. A weapon can be seen as both a item to protect oneself and ones family therefore giving a weapon a potential sacred status. As well life being viewed as sacred, something which can take a life may also be sacred. We see many weapons which have talisman that are not merely decorative but serve to protect the owner...this applies to both sacrificial knives, axes and other tools as well as weapons of warfare.

Just to throw out an example here is some pictures of K.Bancha off KRM of a sword blessing ceremony...

Philip reminded me though in Chinese culture it was old custom for a jian to be above the head of newborn crib...and later this evolved into a jian made of coins

http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=2583

This being said...I thought I would add a little humor in saying all animals are sacred too...Cows are sacred in the Hindu religion...and last week I saw a posting that in honor of St. Francis of Assisi, the local Christian church was going to have a blessing of the animals....I didn't go...but I was told people brought their pets...including a bunny rabbit...bird, cat & dog...so all animals must be sacred too

KuKulzA28 · 12th October 2010, 06:58 AM

Should the oldest Ak-47s and M16s be sent back to Russia and the USA? We may have to ask ourselves that question in a few decades. What of composite pieces? An Indonesian piece with a Chinese or Indian imported blade with European stylistic influences on the guard? What about a musket from the late 1700s found in colonial North America? Does it belong to the Dutch, French, or the English or does it belong to the USA? What about a club or arrowheads belonging to the Massachuset Tribe which was largely killed off and has a few descendants left?

Weapons are force multipliers. They maximize the damage of a thrust, cut, smash... or project objects that pierce the opponent's body. They are just tools to make us humans deadlier. By themselves, their value is only when one needs to injure or kill another. But the idea of value, a person's sense of value with regards to a weapon, a family's, a culture's, a country's, etc. is different. Culture and history become tied with an object used to make killing more efficient. Weapons often reflect this in their style, decorations, materials, logos, colors, etc.

In the end some are sold because they are no longer valued. Some were seized by conquerers because they are valuable to the original owners. And some are sold because of cultural taboo or poverty...

I say it depends on an individual basis, if you can trace the origin of a piece... but in the end if the piece is better off with you than back with its people (for whatever reason), maybe you ought to keep it. Truly understanding everything about a weapon involves historical, cultural, and hoplological knowledge... a major journey.

Often you cannot trace the origin of a weapon however (in terms of how it went from a prized weapon to being sold on the market).

Even if you could and see that perhaps the descendants of its owner would probably like it back in their lineage... you did buy it with your hard earned money. A sweat-shop worker might like the clothes he/she is making but cannot have, and while you may feel bad and want to give him or her your nice clothes... you did work to earn the money to pay for those clothes which you now wear.

VANDOO · 12th October 2010, 06:59 AM

MANS HISTORY HAS ALWAYS LED TO ENCOUNTERES BETWEEN DIFFERENT CULTURES. OFTEN THIS CAUSES DRASTIC CHANGES IN ONE OR BOTH CULTURES. IN MANY OCEANIC CULTURES THE STEEL WEAPON AND GUN REPLACED CLUBS AND SPEARS AND MISSONARIES TAUGHT AGAINST THE OLD WAYS AND WEAPONS AND RITUALS WERE LOST. WHO KNOWS HOW MANY OLD WAR CLUBS, SPEARS AND SUCH EITHER ROTTED IN A SHED OR BURNED OR WERE THROWN ON THE GARBAGE HEAP.

I THINK THE MOVEMENT OF THESE OBJECTS BETWEEN CULTURES AND COUNTRIES ENRICHES AND ENCOURAGES INTREST AND LEARNING. ITS KIND OF A TYPE OF CROSS POLLINATION OF CULTURES AND BELIEFS.
SO I VOTE THAT OFTEN THESE PEOPLE WHO CARRIED OFF ARTEFACTS AND CARED FOR THEM OR DONATED THEM TO MUSEUMS, DID GOOD AS THEY PRESERVED THINGS THAT WOULD MOST LIKELY HAVE BEEN LOST. THOSE WHO STUDIED AND WROTE DOWN THE CUSTOMS OF THE PEOPLE AS WELL AS COLLECTED ARTEFACTS AND DREW SKETCHES WERE THE MOST VALUABLE AS OTHERWISE ALL MAY HAVE BEEN LOST AS THE CULTURE CHANGED OVER TIME. PEOPLE HAVE A WAY OF WANTING THE NEW AND DISCARDING THE OLD IF THEY CAN AFFORD IT. AT LEAST THAT WAS THE WAY OF IT WHEN I GREW UP. I GUESS THE WORD ANTIQUE HAD NOT BEEN IN WIDE USE TO ENABLE SELLERS TO SELL OLD USED STUFF.

IF I REMEMBER THE STORY CORRECTLY THE ACROPOLIS WAS OCCUPIED BY AN INVADING ARMY WHO WAS TEARING IT UP AND USING THE FIGURES FOR TARGET PRACTICE. THE ENGLISHMAN GOT PERMISSION AND NO DOUBT PAYED TO TAKE SOME OF THE BEST CARVINGS. WHICH WERE SUBSEQUENTLY LOST AT SEA. WOULD ALL THE MARBLES BEEN BLASTED TO BITS LIKE THE SPHINX LOST ITS NOSE IN EGYPT IF HE HAD NOT TAKEN THEM??? WHO KNOWS!! BUT THEY HAVE SURVIVED WHO GETS THEM NOW IS LESS IMPORTANT THAN THE FACT THAT THEY STILL EXHIST.
I THINK ITS BETTER TO HAVE ITEMS FROM DIFFERENT CULTURES SPREAD OVER THE WORLD THAN FOR ALL ARTEFACTS TO STAY ONLY IN THE COUNTRY OR TRIBE FOREVER. THERE IS MUCH TO BE LEARNED FROM DIFFERENT CULTURES AND OFTEN SOMEONE FROM OUTSIDE THE CULTURE CAN DO VALUABLE WORK THAT THE CULTURE MAY NOT DO ITSELF. IF AN ITEM IS STOLEN OR LOOTED THEN IT SHOULD BE RETURNED BUT IF IT IS SOLD BY ITS OWNER TO HELP HIS FAMILY THATS OK.
IN WAR WARRIORS HAVE ALWAYS TAKEN THE DISCARDED WEAPONS AND SOUVINEERS FROM THOSE WHO HAVE FLED OR WERE VANQUISHED, ITS TRADITION. WAR IS NOT A GOOD THING BUT WILL MOST LIKELY ALWAYS BE A CURSE ON ALL MANKIND. THE RULES OF WAR HAVE CHANGED A LITTLE THE PURPOSE IS NO LONGER TO COLLECT HEADS, SCALPS, SLAVES OR BODIES FOR A FEAST. TODAY THEY ARE FOUGHT OVER WEALTH, FOOD, LAND AND OLD TRADITIONAL FUEDS OFTEN GOING BACK FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS. SOME FIGHT TO SURVIVE AND SOME MAKE WAR TO ENFORCE THEIR BELIEFS OR CONQUER AND ENSLAVE AND LOOT THEIR NEGHBORS.
THE LITTLE WE DO IN COLLECTING, PRESERVING AND LEARNING ABOUT THE ITEMS AND THE CULTURES AND THE HISTORY. DOES MUCH MORE GOOD THAN HARM THOUGH FEW WILL APPRECIATE WHY WE DO IT AND MANY FIND US CRAZY NO DOUBT.

KuKulzA28 · 12th October 2010, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VANDOO

[.....] THE LITTLE WE DO IN COLLECTING, PRESERVING AND LEARNING ABOUT THE ITEMS AND THE CULTURES AND THE HISTORY. DOES MUCH MORE GOOD THAN HARM THOUGH FEW WILL APPRECIATE WHY WE DO IT AND MANY FIND US CRAZY NO DOUBT.

I say in general that is true, good point.

Rescuing an endangered species with the intention of preserving the genetic integrity of the species and possibly re-introducing it into the wild... is kind of like preserving a collection of old weapons that may someday regain or gain more recognition as a valuable part of a people's history and culture. Obviously conditions weren't right or the animal wouldn't be on the verge of extinction... obviously conditions aren't right or these weapons probably wouldn't have ended up in your collection!

Weapon collectors are sometimes said to be crazy. Why I don't know?

laEspadaAncha · 12th October 2010, 09:35 AM

Hi Nathaniel,

I have voiced my opinion on this before, and am happy to share it again.

The need to repatriate objects of cultural importance to their "homeland" is a relatively recent invention, spurned by the push for nationalism and nationalist retentionism by political entities. Why does a Roman antiquity found in Tunisia belong to Italy? Not only was there no nation-state of Italy in existence 2,000 years ago, but is that object not a part of the Tunisian cultural identity? The same can be said of edged weapons from the modern day incarnations of the Philippines or Indonesia, which through trade and migration invariably found their way from island to island, long before these current national identities ever existed.

Furthermore, there are considerations regarding how an item came into the possession of someone halfway around the world from its culture of origin. This aspect of the discussion came to light regarding several Moro weapons I am in possession of that formerly belonged to a Brigadier General who earlier in his career played an important role in the Moro Insurrection - both as a warrior and a diplomat, even at one time serving as an analog to the "best man" at a wedding between one datu and the daughter of another.

This recent "nationalist retentionist" push limits access to objects that are as much a tribute to makind's culture as they are to that of any contemporary political identity. This, in turn, limits the opportunity to learn more about the incredible journey we as a race have all taken to this point, a tale more aptly told to much wider audiences by regional encyclopedic museums. I don't know when I will make it to Cairo. But the San Diego Museum of Man has an impressive permanent ancient Egypt exhibit that has educated countless individuals like myself who may otherwise never have the chance to visit these artifacts if they were to be found only in Africa.

Lastly, with regards to the value of private collections, what you see in a museum gallery represents an insignificantly small percentage of a museum's collection, the rest of which remains stored underneath in the vaults, far from the view of the public's eye. It is us, the community of private collectors, who stoke the fire of interest, and (albeit on a much smaller scale) provide what an object stored in the far corner of a museum vault cannot - an opportunity to enlighten someone about a culture that represents a small part of the tapestry of mankind and the journey we have all taken together.

fearn · 12th October 2010, 04:42 PM

I'd also add in the CITES argument to this mix (link to CITES thread).

This is an added layer of complexity. Many weapons have ivory, tiger parts, turtle shell, rhino horn and other material from endangered species. Unless you have a provenanced item that pre-dates the CITES ban on that species, you can't move that item out of its homeland. Antiques are exempt from the ban (within the limits of the link above, and they aren't small).

So there is an irony here. When something becomes valuable as an antique, it may also be more able to travel beyond its homeland.

Personally, I'd say that if you're worried about this, you better be worrying about properly curating your collection with the best available techniques. That way, your collections will live on after you pass, and if the descendants of the original owners want them back, they will still be around to go back.

Best,

F

Nathaniel · 13th October 2010, 01:42 AM

Thank you to all who have contributed you thoughts and experiences so far: Niel, Freebooter, Fern, Vandoo, KuKulzA28, laEspadaAncha, Lew, imas560 & kahnjar1. I think you all have brought up very good points.

Another lament I hear as well as that foreign interest in antiquities also drives up the price out of reach of locals....

or similar that the average person from Country A has to work month or longer to buy the same plane ticket that person from Country B earns in a week.

KuKulzA28 · 13th October 2010, 02:22 AM

You're welcome, and thanks Nathaniel for bringing this up... definitely a very interesting subject. Considering the larger picture and the reasons why and ethical concerns regarding this antique weapon collecting hobby - good thing to discuss. I was actually thinking about this myself at one point a few weeks back... However I myself don't usually own antiques, I would much rather enjoy them and then pass them along to folks who can take much better care of them - like you guys! They can be quite fascinating though...

Nathaniel · 13th October 2010, 02:25 AM

Here is another interesting case like the Elgin Marbles...but of SEA nature
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/17/us...rt-museum.html

The debate was in heat in 1988 between Thai protesters & US museum supporters regarding a temple lintel from an Khmer temple of Phnom Rung in Buri Ram province along the Thai and Cambodian border that was brought to the USA in 1966 and donated later to Art Institute of Chicago.

One of the most popular Thai bands in modern history, Carabao

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carabao_(band)

wrote a song regarding the debate for which the song chorus translates as "Take back Michael Jackson, give us back the Phra Narai!"

Whoa...pretty song lyrics, huh? Yet, I'm not sure if it was meant in humor I have trouble with not laughing...sorry...maybe this would have been more humorous if Micheal were still alive?

Anyways, for your viewing pleasure here is the Carabao music video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0u4vgUfDCxQ

It is quite interesting to watch...US military choppers in the intro...some Thai moon walking...check it out.

On a side note, the lead singer of Carabao is also the one who the Thai energy drink Carabao: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carabao_Dang

(aka Carabao Dang....Carabao = Water Buffalo + Dang = Red....ie Red for the color of the drink...it similar to the more well known Thai energy drink: Red Bull, though no relation)

Nathaniel · 14th October 2010, 01:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathaniel

Here is another interesting case like the Elgin Marbles...but of SEA nature
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/17/us...rt-museum.html

The debate was in heat in 1988 between Thai protesters & US museum supporters regarding a temple lintel from an Khmer temple of Phnom Rung in Buri Ram province along the Thai and Cambodian border that was brought to the USA in 1966 and donated later to Art Institute of Chicago.

One of the most popular Thai bands in modern history, Carabao

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carabao_(band)

wrote a song regarding the debate for which the song chorus translates as "Take back Michael Jackson, give us back the Phra Narai!"

Whoa...pretty song lyrics, huh? Yet, I'm not sure if it was meant in humor I have trouble with not laughing...sorry...maybe this would have been more humorous if Micheal were still alive?

Anyways, for your viewing pleasure here is the Carabao music video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0u4vgUfDCxQ

It is quite interesting to watch...US military choppers in the intro...some Thai moon walking...check it out.

On a side note, the lead singer of Carabao is also the one who the Thai energy drink Carabao: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carabao_Dang

(aka Carabao Dang....Carabao = Water Buffalo + Dang = Red....ie Red for the color of the drink...it similar to the more well known Thai energy drink: Red Bull, though no relation)

I added the above directly because this came up in a native forum topic about 'competing with foreign collectors'...brining up this debate & music video from 1988. I think it's ironic that Michael Jackson to be the subject of the song as Michael was the one who wrote the song: "Black or White"...and lyrics: "You can be my brother, it don't matter if your black or white!"

ThePepperSkull · 14th October 2010, 06:42 PM

being on both ends of the spectrum (being a student of various philippine and s.e.a cultures and their appropriate accoutrement, AND being of partly visayan/sulu malay ethnic origin), what I can weigh into this conversation that no one else has is reasoning behind why there are two opposing opinions.

I believe that these differing opinions stem from a different viewpoint, mostly. The funny thing is, I can see merit in both viewpoints, but believe they are both not completely or adequately informed.

Firstly, what we do here (collecting various ethnographic artifacts), from our point of view, comes out of respect for these cultures and demonstrates a keen interest on learning more about them. there's nothing at all nefarious in that. Our goal is knowledge and our methods imply respect. If we did not hold onto these pieces of history, they would be lost on someone who did not appreciate their cultural or historical significance, or maybe worse; they may be taken care of poorly and yet another artifacts will be lost to the ravages of time

However, from the other standpoint, many believe that because there are so many pieces displayed in foreign lands or even in personal collections that it is an implied disrespect to the culture. To have something ripped away from your land during war only to be displayed as a trophy, a symbol of conquest rather than pride. Why not repatriate it to an appropriate museum in its homeland? Why hoard these material things? Why accumulate and accumulate and accumulate so ravenously?

Of course, both of these arguments are very one-domensional and therein lay the problem. A lack of understanding where one or the other comes from can lead to a somewhat skewed and unrealistic perception.

That is why I really appreciate this discussion. We can definitely expand our ways of thinking to include both viewpoints rather than exclude one, and in doing so we can work to understand one another's viewpoints more clearly -- and maybe even change these viewpoints for the better. After all, isn't that level of understanding and intercultural knowledge the essence of what we're all here for? I think so. And for this I am thankful for this discussion, Nathaniel. Great thread.

KuKulzA28 · 14th October 2010, 07:22 PM

Great points Pepperskull.... lack of understanding is the root of many conflicts...
Like they say any good relationship needs good communication!

Nathaniel · 14th October 2010, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThePepperSkull

being on both ends of the spectrum (being a student of various philippine and s.e.a cultures and their appropriate accoutrement, AND being of partly visayan/sulu malay ethnic origin), what I can weigh into this conversation that no one else has is reasoning behind why there are two opposing opinions.

I believe that these differing opinions stem from a different viewpoint, mostly. The funny thing is, I can see merit in both viewpoints, but believe they are both not completely or adequately informed.

Firstly, what we do here (collecting various ethnographic artifacts), from our point of view, comes out of respect for these cultures and demonstrates a keen interest on learning more about them. there's nothing at all nefarious in that. Our goal is knowledge and our methods imply respect. If we did not hold onto these pieces of history, they would be lost on someone who did not appreciate their cultural or historical significance, or maybe worse; they may be taken care of poorly and yet another artifacts will be lost to the ravages of time

However, from the other standpoint, many believe that because there are so many pieces displayed in foreign lands or even in personal collections that it is an implied disrespect to the culture. To have something ripped away from your land during war only to be displayed as a trophy, a symbol of conquest rather than pride. Why not repatriate it to an appropriate museum in its homeland? Why hoard these material things? Why accumulate and accumulate and accumulate so ravenously?

Of course, both of these arguments are very one-domensional and therein lay the problem. A lack of understanding where one or the other comes from can lead to a somewhat skewed and unrealistic perception.

That is why I really appreciate this discussion. We can definitely expand our ways of thinking to include both viewpoints rather than exclude one, and in doing so we can work to understand one another's viewpoints more clearly -- and maybe even change these viewpoints for the better. After all, isn't that level of understanding and intercultural knowledge the essence of what we're all here for? I think so. And for this I am thankful for this discussion, Nathaniel. Great thread.

Peppered Skull,

Thank you very much for bring up such good points on the local/native perspective, this is exactly as I wanted, because I know by the very nature of this forum purpose it maybe bias...and the issues posed can easily make people uncomfortable or raise to defense, but that is the very reason why I felt it was important to bring up this topic. I know it will not necessarily change things...or believe that people should send back their precious pieces to their country of origin, but believe it is a good open conversation to have so that perhaps both sides can understand each other better...this was my purpose...this is my goal. To hopefully disarm the situation even if just a little.

Lew · 15th October 2010, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathaniel

Peppered Skull,

Thank you very much for bring up such good points on the local/native perspective, this is exactly as I wanted, because I know by the very nature of this forum purpose it maybe bias...and the issues posed can easily make people uncomfortable or raise to defense, but that is the very reason why I felt it was important to bring up this topic. I know it will not necessarily change things...or believe that people should send back their precious pieces to their country of origin, but believe it is a good open conversation to have so that perhaps both sides can understand each other better...this was my purpose...this is my goal. To hopefully disarm the situation even if just a little.

Nathaniel

I really don't think the nature of this forum is bias in any way shape or form and there is no situation to disarm here.

We are all here to share our knowlege with others concerning the study of ethnographic weapons so let us stick to that idea.

Lew

Nathaniel · 16th October 2010, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lew

Nathaniel

I really don't think the nature of this forum is bias in any way shape or form and there is no situation to disarm here.

We are all here to share our knowlege with others concerning the study of ethnographic weapons so let us stick to that idea.

Lew

Lew,

By Bias, I mean the majority of collect from other cultures, so this already means that those people believe that it is right to do, the other side is those who are from the native cultures, who might believe non natives should not be removing these items in the past, present or future. So by Bias I mean by proposing this debate to a forum that the majority of members collect from cultures that are non their own there could be a potential bias towards pro-collecting from other cultures.

The situation is the tension that occurs between these two groups/ opinions. I have experienced this situation because I am in contact with people from the SEA cultures I primarily collect from in which I have found locals who are surprised to see a foreigner interested in their culture and their response is positive and helpful...others have responded negatively, expressing their dissatisfaction with driving up prices & stealing/ buying their cultural heritage, etc.

By Disarming the Situation, therefore goes back to the purpose of the thread was just to bring up this topic for discussion to as Pepper Skull correctly stated:

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThePepperSkull

Of course, both of these arguments are very one-dimensional and therein lay the problem. A lack of understanding where one or the other comes from can lead to a somewhat skewed and unrealistic perception.

That is why I really appreciate this discussion. We can definitely expand our ways of thinking to include both viewpoints rather than exclude one, and in doing so we can work to understand one another's viewpoints more clearly -- and maybe even change these viewpoints for the better. After all, isn't that level of understanding and intercultural knowledge the essence of what we're all here for? ThePepperSkull

Highest regards & respect to all who have shared their views. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Nathaniel

12th October 2010, 12:46 AM	#1
Nathaniel Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 865	Weighing in...collecting from other cultures... Hello all! I thought I would start a thread and hear peoples thoughts on on a semi sensitive subject.. Collecting antiquities from other cultures...I've met online/ in person collectors from the cultures I collect....some are very helpful and enthusiastic that others are interested in their culture, while others seem to lament about "their cultural heritage" being in foreign lands/hands. I can empathize to an extent.... I can think of parallel examples such the Elgin Marbles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elgin_Marbles Interesting read...at the bottom there are points on both sides of the debate of whether the frescoes should be kept in England or returned to Athens. Back to bladed antiquities...which parallels some of the same debate....We have all seen pictures of native museums that have wonderful preservation....and others who make us shutter to see active rust and open air exposure to the elements Some of this can obviously be explained by lack of funding or education of proper preservation...or a difference in cultural attitude towards preservation ...or differing opinions as to the extent of restoration a piece should under go...as we can easily find here among forum members...at one point it preserves at another point it brings out hidden beauty...and to others it drops the value. Most of the best examples I've seen of many cultures weapons are from collections, museums in Europe and the US....which can be partly explained by bring backs from travelers or careers abroad...purchased at times when perhaps the native culture did not appreciate as much their "old things" or perhaps at less fortunate times when selling something to get by. And the better condition of the antiquities due to better care...such as nice layer of oil applied to blade to ward off rust...or something as simple as a change in climate...such as a less humid climate compared to their country of origin. Some argue that if such items where not removed from the of origin it would have been lost to neglect, war, pollution, etc On the darker end of the spectrum I have also seen items that have been stolen/ smuggled out of a country....items such as a severed Buddha head that was taken from temple in Northern Thailand...I find sickening...interestingly this was the subject of a great Thai action movie: Ong Bak - Thai Warrior. (This bridges of course into sacred religious items which should always be treated with respect regardless of ones faith and never violated in such way.) I should also point out that at the same time many countries have laws against removal of antiquities from the country....but at the same time have a large population of antique shops?!? What constitutes something that should not be taken out of the country? At what age does the item become an antique? Major items like a large marble fresco I think we can all agree on....but something like a sword, a knife or musket? these are everyday utility items...should they be considered the same cultural value as the marble fresco? Both are of value...part of course is weighed by the rarity. Last edited by Nathaniel; 12th October 2010 at 02:41 PM.

12th October 2010, 05:39 AM	#9
Nathaniel Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 865	Thanks guys for sharing your thoughts I agree, we are only temporary custodians and regardless of our origin it is most respectful to help learn from each other, preserve and pass this on to future generations regardless of age, race, color or creed. Very few of us are 100% anything I might add...scratch below the surface and you see all of our family roots are mix of tribes/ countries/denominations & religions that make in who we are today...so to come out with xenophobic/ xenocentric attitude is not much more than a farce. It is interesting how attitudes change with time...I have been told from more than one source that there is a Thai belief that swords and even pictures of swords could bring conflict and disharmony to a home if displayed within so that explains some of why perhaps until recently they haven’t been valued by many folks…but this is changing as superstitions become less ‘believed’. With regards to your comment that a weapon is not sacred, I would follow by saying that to a certain extend it maybe in other cultures. A weapon can be seen as both a item to protect oneself and ones family therefore giving a weapon a potential sacred status. As well life being viewed as sacred, something which can take a life may also be sacred. We see many weapons which have talisman that are not merely decorative but serve to protect the owner...this applies to both sacrificial knives, axes and other tools as well as weapons of warfare. Just to throw out an example here is some pictures of K.Bancha off KRM of a sword blessing ceremony... Philip reminded me though in Chinese culture it was old custom for a jian to be above the head of newborn crib...and later this evolved into a jian made of coins http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=2583 This being said...I thought I would add a little humor in saying all animals are sacred too...Cows are sacred in the Hindu religion...and last week I saw a posting that in honor of St. Francis of Assisi, the local Christian church was going to have a blessing of the animals....I didn't go...but I was told people brought their pets...including a bunny rabbit...bird, cat & dog...so all animals must be sacred too Last edited by Nathaniel; 12th October 2010 at 02:49 PM.

13th October 2010, 02:25 AM	#17
Nathaniel Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 865	Here is another interesting case like the Elgin Marbles...but of SEA nature http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/17/us...rt-museum.html The debate was in heat in 1988 between Thai protesters & US museum supporters regarding a temple lintel from an Khmer temple of Phnom Rung in Buri Ram province along the Thai and Cambodian border that was brought to the USA in 1966 and donated later to Art Institute of Chicago. One of the most popular Thai bands in modern history, Carabao http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carabao_(band) wrote a song regarding the debate for which the song chorus translates as "Take back Michael Jackson, give us back the Phra Narai!" Whoa...pretty song lyrics, huh? Yet, I'm not sure if it was meant in humor I have trouble with not laughing...sorry...maybe this would have been more humorous if Micheal were still alive? Anyways, for your viewing pleasure here is the Carabao music video... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0u4vgUfDCxQ It is quite interesting to watch...US military choppers in the intro...some Thai moon walking...check it out. On a side note, the lead singer of Carabao is also the one who the Thai energy drink Carabao: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carabao_Dang (aka Carabao Dang....Carabao = Water Buffalo + Dang = Red....ie Red for the color of the drink...it similar to the more well known Thai energy drink: Red Bull, though no relation) Last edited by Nathaniel; 13th October 2010 at 03:00 PM.

12th October 2010, 02:37 AM	#2
Nathaniel Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 865	....Okay, so while that is not all...I would love to hear the opinions of others...I see there have been several views..

12th October 2010, 03:06 AM	#3
imas560 Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 180	Interesting subject, how much should a person know before embarking on collecting from another culture? I think I stepped on some toes last year when I was in Kuala Kangsar wanting a keris repaired and wanting to get some items made. I may have inadvertently caused offence by my lack of knowledge of what was allowable on a keris. I had posted on a couple of forums (unfortunately not this one) and thought I had gathered enough information to think I was ok in requesting a dragon head on a custom made keris. But when I described what I wanted I got a very distinct vibe of causing offence. In the end I requested a keris without the dragon head and some other items including a Pedang that was to have a dragon head hilt. It's been over a year and still no word on the items being made or the keris being repaired. I have a niggling feeling that I'm not going to see the items or the deposit and that the keris may be "lost". In regards to an item being classified as old and not being allowed out of the country I believe in New Zealand (where I live) any indigenous artifacts over 50 years old are not allowed to be sold for export. I may be wrong but I will try and hunt out the info. BTW the keris for repair was bought at auction in NZ and I transported it back to Malaysia to be repaired. I thought I would treat it reverently and get it repaired in it's homeland.

12th October 2010, 03:28 AM	#4
Neil Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 109	That is an interesting line of questioning Nathanial. For me, a weapon is not a sacred object and can in that light be fair game to collect, appreciate, and study by those in an outsider group. Although some weapons may be of major historic significance warranting some measure of government regulations to at least keep them in the country of their origin. Personally, I think in the end it is up to conscientious individuals inside and out to preserve and pass on the knowledge and stories that these things represent.

12th October 2010, 03:33 AM	#6
kahnjar1 Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: CHRISTCHURCH NEW ZEALAND Posts: 2,739	Good to know there is another member (apart from Illiad) residing in NZ. The subject raised by Nathaniel has been discussed here in part in previous posts, and is (or can be) a touchy subject especially where native races are involved. This all began in a large way during the "colonial" era, when mainly european powers were grabbing as much of the world as they could in as short a time as possible, and raped and pillaged antiquities at the same time. In the case of NZ it is the Maori who are repatriating as much of their tribal heritage as possible, and I agree with this. However the term "cultural" also relates to the ordinary, and for the most part common items, of ANY particular ethnic race. Hence it also should apply to such things as English and other antique weapons as much as to items of other origins. Are we about to send all these back to their countries of origin? I don't think so!! IF an item is of particular HISTORICAL or TRIBAL interest then that is a different matter. Most of us collect "mainstream" items, and are probably not lucky enough or rich enough to own really important pieces. Regards Stuart

12th October 2010, 03:37 AM	#7
Lew (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: East Coast USA Posts: 3,191	Well I do Not agree with the argument that some of these old weapons belong back in their native countries. Some areas in Africa where there is civil,political and economic unrest these weapons would probably be melted down for scrap. We collectors are only temporary custodians of these items and in a way we insure that they will be around for future generations to enjoy. Hopefully one day some of these pieces will find their way back to their country of origin.

12th October 2010, 06:58 AM	#10
KuKulzA28 Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: between work and sleep Posts: 731	Should the oldest Ak-47s and M16s be sent back to Russia and the USA? We may have to ask ourselves that question in a few decades. What of composite pieces? An Indonesian piece with a Chinese or Indian imported blade with European stylistic influences on the guard? What about a musket from the late 1700s found in colonial North America? Does it belong to the Dutch, French, or the English or does it belong to the USA? What about a club or arrowheads belonging to the Massachuset Tribe which was largely killed off and has a few descendants left? Weapons are force multipliers. They maximize the damage of a thrust, cut, smash... or project objects that pierce the opponent's body. They are just tools to make us humans deadlier. By themselves, their value is only when one needs to injure or kill another. But the idea of value, a person's sense of value with regards to a weapon, a family's, a culture's, a country's, etc. is different. Culture and history become tied with an object used to make killing more efficient. Weapons often reflect this in their style, decorations, materials, logos, colors, etc. In the end some are sold because they are no longer valued. Some were seized by conquerers because they are valuable to the original owners. And some are sold because of cultural taboo or poverty... I say it depends on an individual basis, if you can trace the origin of a piece... but in the end if the piece is better off with you than back with its people (for whatever reason), maybe you ought to keep it. Truly understanding everything about a weapon involves historical, cultural, and hoplological knowledge... a major journey. Often you cannot trace the origin of a weapon however (in terms of how it went from a prized weapon to being sold on the market). Even if you could and see that perhaps the descendants of its owner would probably like it back in their lineage... you did buy it with your hard earned money. A sweat-shop worker might like the clothes he/she is making but cannot have, and while you may feel bad and want to give him or her your nice clothes... you did work to earn the money to pay for those clothes which you now wear.

12th October 2010, 06:59 AM	#11
VANDOO (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OKLAHOMA, USA Posts: 3,138	MANS HISTORY HAS ALWAYS LED TO ENCOUNTERES BETWEEN DIFFERENT CULTURES. OFTEN THIS CAUSES DRASTIC CHANGES IN ONE OR BOTH CULTURES. IN MANY OCEANIC CULTURES THE STEEL WEAPON AND GUN REPLACED CLUBS AND SPEARS AND MISSONARIES TAUGHT AGAINST THE OLD WAYS AND WEAPONS AND RITUALS WERE LOST. WHO KNOWS HOW MANY OLD WAR CLUBS, SPEARS AND SUCH EITHER ROTTED IN A SHED OR BURNED OR WERE THROWN ON THE GARBAGE HEAP. I THINK THE MOVEMENT OF THESE OBJECTS BETWEEN CULTURES AND COUNTRIES ENRICHES AND ENCOURAGES INTREST AND LEARNING. ITS KIND OF A TYPE OF CROSS POLLINATION OF CULTURES AND BELIEFS. SO I VOTE THAT OFTEN THESE PEOPLE WHO CARRIED OFF ARTEFACTS AND CARED FOR THEM OR DONATED THEM TO MUSEUMS, DID GOOD AS THEY PRESERVED THINGS THAT WOULD MOST LIKELY HAVE BEEN LOST. THOSE WHO STUDIED AND WROTE DOWN THE CUSTOMS OF THE PEOPLE AS WELL AS COLLECTED ARTEFACTS AND DREW SKETCHES WERE THE MOST VALUABLE AS OTHERWISE ALL MAY HAVE BEEN LOST AS THE CULTURE CHANGED OVER TIME. PEOPLE HAVE A WAY OF WANTING THE NEW AND DISCARDING THE OLD IF THEY CAN AFFORD IT. AT LEAST THAT WAS THE WAY OF IT WHEN I GREW UP. I GUESS THE WORD ANTIQUE HAD NOT BEEN IN WIDE USE TO ENABLE SELLERS TO SELL OLD USED STUFF. IF I REMEMBER THE STORY CORRECTLY THE ACROPOLIS WAS OCCUPIED BY AN INVADING ARMY WHO WAS TEARING IT UP AND USING THE FIGURES FOR TARGET PRACTICE. THE ENGLISHMAN GOT PERMISSION AND NO DOUBT PAYED TO TAKE SOME OF THE BEST CARVINGS. WHICH WERE SUBSEQUENTLY LOST AT SEA. WOULD ALL THE MARBLES BEEN BLASTED TO BITS LIKE THE SPHINX LOST ITS NOSE IN EGYPT IF HE HAD NOT TAKEN THEM??? WHO KNOWS!! BUT THEY HAVE SURVIVED WHO GETS THEM NOW IS LESS IMPORTANT THAN THE FACT THAT THEY STILL EXHIST. I THINK ITS BETTER TO HAVE ITEMS FROM DIFFERENT CULTURES SPREAD OVER THE WORLD THAN FOR ALL ARTEFACTS TO STAY ONLY IN THE COUNTRY OR TRIBE FOREVER. THERE IS MUCH TO BE LEARNED FROM DIFFERENT CULTURES AND OFTEN SOMEONE FROM OUTSIDE THE CULTURE CAN DO VALUABLE WORK THAT THE CULTURE MAY NOT DO ITSELF. IF AN ITEM IS STOLEN OR LOOTED THEN IT SHOULD BE RETURNED BUT IF IT IS SOLD BY ITS OWNER TO HELP HIS FAMILY THATS OK. IN WAR WARRIORS HAVE ALWAYS TAKEN THE DISCARDED WEAPONS AND SOUVINEERS FROM THOSE WHO HAVE FLED OR WERE VANQUISHED, ITS TRADITION. WAR IS NOT A GOOD THING BUT WILL MOST LIKELY ALWAYS BE A CURSE ON ALL MANKIND. THE RULES OF WAR HAVE CHANGED A LITTLE THE PURPOSE IS NO LONGER TO COLLECT HEADS, SCALPS, SLAVES OR BODIES FOR A FEAST. TODAY THEY ARE FOUGHT OVER WEALTH, FOOD, LAND AND OLD TRADITIONAL FUEDS OFTEN GOING BACK FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS. SOME FIGHT TO SURVIVE AND SOME MAKE WAR TO ENFORCE THEIR BELIEFS OR CONQUER AND ENSLAVE AND LOOT THEIR NEGHBORS. THE LITTLE WE DO IN COLLECTING, PRESERVING AND LEARNING ABOUT THE ITEMS AND THE CULTURES AND THE HISTORY. DOES MUCH MORE GOOD THAN HARM THOUGH FEW WILL APPRECIATE WHY WE DO IT AND MANY FIND US CRAZY NO DOUBT.

12th October 2010, 09:35 AM	#13
laEspadaAncha Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 608	Hi Nathaniel, I have voiced my opinion on this before, and am happy to share it again. The need to repatriate objects of cultural importance to their "homeland" is a relatively recent invention, spurned by the push for nationalism and nationalist retentionism by political entities. Why does a Roman antiquity found in Tunisia belong to Italy? Not only was there no nation-state of Italy in existence 2,000 years ago, but is that object not a part of the Tunisian cultural identity? The same can be said of edged weapons from the modern day incarnations of the Philippines or Indonesia, which through trade and migration invariably found their way from island to island, long before these current national identities ever existed. Furthermore, there are considerations regarding how an item came into the possession of someone halfway around the world from its culture of origin. This aspect of the discussion came to light regarding several Moro weapons I am in possession of that formerly belonged to a Brigadier General who earlier in his career played an important role in the Moro Insurrection - both as a warrior and a diplomat, even at one time serving as an analog to the "best man" at a wedding between one datu and the daughter of another. This recent "nationalist retentionist" push limits access to objects that are as much a tribute to makind's culture as they are to that of any contemporary political identity. This, in turn, limits the opportunity to learn more about the incredible journey we as a race have all taken to this point, a tale more aptly told to much wider audiences by regional encyclopedic museums. I don't know when I will make it to Cairo. But the San Diego Museum of Man has an impressive permanent ancient Egypt exhibit that has educated countless individuals like myself who may otherwise never have the chance to visit these artifacts if they were to be found only in Africa. Lastly, with regards to the value of private collections, what you see in a museum gallery represents an insignificantly small percentage of a museum's collection, the rest of which remains stored underneath in the vaults, far from the view of the public's eye. It is us, the community of private collectors, who stoke the fire of interest, and (albeit on a much smaller scale) provide what an object stored in the far corner of a museum vault cannot - an opportunity to enlighten someone about a culture that represents a small part of the tapestry of mankind and the journey we have all taken together.

12th October 2010, 04:42 PM	#14
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	I'd also add in the CITES argument to this mix (link to CITES thread). This is an added layer of complexity. Many weapons have ivory, tiger parts, turtle shell, rhino horn and other material from endangered species. Unless you have a provenanced item that pre-dates the CITES ban on that species, you can't move that item out of its homeland. Antiques are exempt from the ban (within the limits of the link above, and they aren't small). So there is an irony here. When something becomes valuable as an antique, it may also be more able to travel beyond its homeland. Personally, I'd say that if you're worried about this, you better be worrying about properly curating your collection with the best available techniques. That way, your collections will live on after you pass, and if the descendants of the original owners want them back, they will still be around to go back. Best, F

13th October 2010, 01:42 AM	#15
Nathaniel Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 865	Thank you to all who have contributed you thoughts and experiences so far: Niel, Freebooter, Fern, Vandoo, KuKulzA28, laEspadaAncha, Lew, imas560 & kahnjar1. I think you all have brought up very good points. Another lament I hear as well as that foreign interest in antiquities also drives up the price out of reach of locals.... or similar that the average person from Country A has to work month or longer to buy the same plane ticket that person from Country B earns in a week.

13th October 2010, 02:22 AM	#16
KuKulzA28 Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: between work and sleep Posts: 731	You're welcome, and thanks Nathaniel for bringing this up... definitely a very interesting subject. Considering the larger picture and the reasons why and ethical concerns regarding this antique weapon collecting hobby - good thing to discuss. I was actually thinking about this myself at one point a few weeks back... However I myself don't usually own antiques, I would much rather enjoy them and then pass them along to folks who can take much better care of them - like you guys! They can be quite fascinating though...

14th October 2010, 06:42 PM	#19
ThePepperSkull Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 338	being on both ends of the spectrum (being a student of various philippine and s.e.a cultures and their appropriate accoutrement, AND being of partly visayan/sulu malay ethnic origin), what I can weigh into this conversation that no one else has is reasoning behind why there are two opposing opinions. I believe that these differing opinions stem from a different viewpoint, mostly. The funny thing is, I can see merit in both viewpoints, but believe they are both not completely or adequately informed. Firstly, what we do here (collecting various ethnographic artifacts), from our point of view, comes out of respect for these cultures and demonstrates a keen interest on learning more about them. there's nothing at all nefarious in that. Our goal is knowledge and our methods imply respect. If we did not hold onto these pieces of history, they would be lost on someone who did not appreciate their cultural or historical significance, or maybe worse; they may be taken care of poorly and yet another artifacts will be lost to the ravages of time However, from the other standpoint, many believe that because there are so many pieces displayed in foreign lands or even in personal collections that it is an implied disrespect to the culture. To have something ripped away from your land during war only to be displayed as a trophy, a symbol of conquest rather than pride. Why not repatriate it to an appropriate museum in its homeland? Why hoard these material things? Why accumulate and accumulate and accumulate so ravenously? Of course, both of these arguments are very one-domensional and therein lay the problem. A lack of understanding where one or the other comes from can lead to a somewhat skewed and unrealistic perception. That is why I really appreciate this discussion. We can definitely expand our ways of thinking to include both viewpoints rather than exclude one, and in doing so we can work to understand one another's viewpoints more clearly -- and maybe even change these viewpoints for the better. After all, isn't that level of understanding and intercultural knowledge the essence of what we're all here for? I think so. And for this I am thankful for this discussion, Nathaniel. Great thread.

14th October 2010, 07:22 PM	#20
KuKulzA28 Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: between work and sleep Posts: 731	Great points Pepperskull.... lack of understanding is the root of many conflicts... Like they say any good relationship needs good communication!